The Loggers should be allowed to continue to cut trees down in the rainforest. The three reasons on why they should continue are that: logging has the ability to benefit the environment, clear-cutting also has the ability to be good for the environment, logging provides useful materials for both building and fuel. Loggers do have the ability to choose how many trees they cut down. Loggers can also choose the amount of clear-cutting they do. Loggers also
Firstly, Logging does benefit the environment. Evidence for this statement are: “When logging is performed, the dead and diseased trees are harvested, thus preventing the spread of the fungi or bacteria which may damage other parts of the tree. In addition, the branches become over-crowded …show more content…
Evidence for this is: “Clearcutting is to regenerate the forest with healthier trees, not to harvest timber. Timber harvesting is a secondary objective.” This supports the claim by explaining how clear-cutting gets rid of the unhealthy or dead trees in order to produce more healthy trees. Other evidence for this subject would be “Clear-cutting does not cause soil erosion. That is caused by poorly laid out road systems, whether the forest is clear-cut or partially cut. Clearcutting can be done without significant erosion or sedimentation if roads are planned and built correctly using accepted best management practices to protect streams.” This helps support the subclaim by telling us that clear-cutting doesn’t cause soil erosion and tells that it is actually poorly laid out roads that caused soil erosion. One more piece of evidence for to support the claim is “Clearcuts can be very beneficial to wildlife. New openings grow very quickly into small trees and berry-and seed-producing shrubs, which provide both food and shelter for wildlife. Clearcutting increases the biological diversity of the forest, which enhances habitat for a variety of wildlife. Some species of wildlife actually thrive better in brushy thickets of seedlings and small saplings.“ this piece of evidence supports the claim by stating that clear-cutting can be beneficial to the wildlife and the environment by creating openings for the bushes to gather sunlight, while making it so that some animals may thrive better in the
Firstly, Logging does benefit the environment. Evidence for this statement are: “When logging is performed, the dead and diseased trees are harvested, thus preventing the spread of the fungi or bacteria which may damage other parts of the tree. In addition, the branches become over-crowded …show more content…
Evidence for this is: “Clearcutting is to regenerate the forest with healthier trees, not to harvest timber. Timber harvesting is a secondary objective.” This supports the claim by explaining how clear-cutting gets rid of the unhealthy or dead trees in order to produce more healthy trees. Other evidence for this subject would be “Clear-cutting does not cause soil erosion. That is caused by poorly laid out road systems, whether the forest is clear-cut or partially cut. Clearcutting can be done without significant erosion or sedimentation if roads are planned and built correctly using accepted best management practices to protect streams.” This helps support the subclaim by telling us that clear-cutting doesn’t cause soil erosion and tells that it is actually poorly laid out roads that caused soil erosion. One more piece of evidence for to support the claim is “Clearcuts can be very beneficial to wildlife. New openings grow very quickly into small trees and berry-and seed-producing shrubs, which provide both food and shelter for wildlife. Clearcutting increases the biological diversity of the forest, which enhances habitat for a variety of wildlife. Some species of wildlife actually thrive better in brushy thickets of seedlings and small saplings.“ this piece of evidence supports the claim by stating that clear-cutting can be beneficial to the wildlife and the environment by creating openings for the bushes to gather sunlight, while making it so that some animals may thrive better in the